The archived blog of the Project On Government Oversight (POGO).

Apr 18, 2012

Stuck in the Past? DOE's Cold War Mindset Leads to Blown Bucks on Nuclear Labs

By MIA STEINLE

We've been saying for some time that the U.S. nuclear weapons complex is a relic of the Cold War. Now it seems even the Department of Defense (DoD) has had enough, according to a Pentagon memo obtained by the Project On Government Oversight, and is calling out the Department of Energy (DOE) for its refusal to downsize its nuclear weapons laboratories. POGO sent a letter to Members of Congress today—along with a copy of the leaked DoD memo—urging them to ensure that DOE does not circumvent the congressional funding process and pour even more money into its oversized lab system. We also urged DOE to follow DoD’s lead by closing redundant lab space and by placing a cap on contractor compensation at the labs.

The DoD memo appears to have been written in response to a new interagency council comprised of DOE, DoD, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The council is looking for ways “to engage in interagency long-term strategic planning” for the DOE labs. Simply put, the interagency council could create new missions for the nuclear weapons labs and could allow the agencies to funnel funding into DOE nuclear projects without congressional approval.

As the DoD memo notes, experts have been urging DOE to downsize its labs (including the three nuclear weapons laboratories) since the end of the Cold War. The White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy concluded in 1995, “the DOE laboratory system is bigger and more expensive than it needs to be,” and there is “excessive duplication of capabilities among the labs.”

However, funding for the labs now exceeds Cold War levels, due in part to lobbying by the DOE lab directors. According to the DoD memo, the Administration’s plans to increase funding to $8.6 billion per year over the next ten years is almost 70 percent higher than spending during the Cold War in constant dollars. In another leaked memo obtained by POGO, an official from the Office of the Secretary of Defense noted that the DOE labs want to take on new missions as a way to justify their oversized infrastructure.

By contrast, the DoD has undertaken five Base Realignment and Closure rounds, or BRACs, since 1988, closing 21 laboratories and eliminating excess capacity. This past November, a DOE Office of Inspector General report concluded that DOE should carry out a BRAC-like review of its labs, which could lead to consolidation or realignment—which are ultimately money-savers for the labs and for taxpayers.

And, as we point out in the letter, taxpayers are footing a hefty bill for the labs. Seven of the top fifteen officials at the three nuclear weapons labs make more than the Administration’s $700,000 executive compensation cap. In theory, any amount above the compensation cap shouldn’t be a burden on taxpayers, as the labs are required to pay for the difference out of their own profits. However, because the labs use their government-granted award fees to pay the difference, taxpayers end up picking up the slack. For instance, in 2009, taxpayer dollars covered all of former Sandia Lab Director Tom Hunter’s $1.7-million salary.

What’s more, the DOE is clearly resistant to transparency, keeping under wraps the justification for the labs’ award fees. Since, 2009, the department has denied the public timely access to its revealing Performance Evaluation Plans (PEPs) and Performance Evaluation Reports (PERs), which POGO called “perhaps the single most important information available to hold NNSA [National Nuclear Security Administration] accountable” in a letter to President Obama. We’ve only been able to see recent PERs due to the efforts of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, which filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the NNSA for access to the documents.

Congress needs to step in. POGO echoes the call of other experts who believe the DOE must reevaluate its oversized, outdated lab system. Instead of giving the DOE lab complex a blank check to continue to grow, it's time to end the bloat.

Comments

I like POGO and its efforts, however one needs to be vigilant about the denigration of a good science institution by those who have axes to grind.

Whenever there is a breakthrough in science in the DOE complex, it has historically and predominantly emanated from Los Alamos, as opposed to Livermore. The sheer overwhelming number of LANL R&D awards is testament to this.

About LLNL people not wanting to move to the boondocks because their coffeeklatsch wives won't relocate, well, the real scientists live full time in Los Alamos, and it has been this way for 68 years.

Want to thank Mia Stienle for the excellent article above.Perhaps in a future article POGO could discuss actual budgets, along with who the major for-profit players are that run these Labs today. The unsuspecting taxpayer might be surprised. And a thanks to Chris Mechels for the historical perspective on LANL. As a retired physician involved for the past decade with the Dept of Labor EEOICPA program for sick DOE nuclear workers, I have a slightly different perspective. That said, I agree with his comments re: LANL's weakness in science and especially the (corrupt) political connections that keep the big bucks rolling in. The multi-million annual compensation packages for the Big 3 Lab Directors is obscene. Not only should the LANSCE project be closed, but let us not forget the hugely expensive CMRR boondoggle; over deadline and over budget by billions. The current Admin. has put CMRR on hold for five years, but it too needs to be deep-sixed forever. It is 40 years past time for the US DOE nuclear weapons complex to scale back,right-size,consolidate,& refocus the mission. Congress must void the blank check!

Not 1 cent more for weapons or war, stop stealing from the American people for wars noone wants. People need work, not Wars, friend, not people hating us for killing people and destroying. Haven't people learned anything from history? Nina

At a time when we are short on money for education, taking
care of our elderly and children, it is deplorable to be
spending extra money that is unneeded in defense spending.
This is just an excuse to give contracts and favors to
friends of politicians and members of defense departments.
We are making an attempt to travel around the world to
diminish the nuclear warheads, yet we want to increase the
spending in our own back yard. God help us!

A bit of history which might prove useful, from the 90s. Then DOE Secretary O'Leary wanted to move all nuclear weapons work out of LLNL, but this failed. The problem was said to be that LLNL nuclear weapons scientists would not relocate to Los Alamos. Drell, and others, warned that LLNL had to keep weapons work, as LANL was too weak.

Historically, the LLNL nuclear scientists look down on LANL as being too conservative and stuck in the 1960s. Having worked in X-Division in the 80s, I say facts support this accusation. Many of LANL's "achievements" were repackaged LLNL work. The LANL scientific weakness, and political connections, make this a nightmare, as O'Leary discovered.

Until we cut through some of the historic lies about LANL's "great science" and start closing questionable projects such as LANSCE, they will continue to misuse taxpayer funds.